Kindle-- still proving why I made the right decision never buying one

[braver]

This thread is silly. Jeff Bezos personally apologized for a technical action taken without his knowledge by mistake (by lower-level folks without thinking things through), and now the enetrprising student had made $150K on his notes.

The fact is that Kindle leads the market, and provides a testbed for the novel cases like removal of content which proves illegal after it's admitted into the system. Same as Apple Store -- it's bound to had happened, and someone had to learn the lesson.

As to the unwarranted generalization, one can simply observe that it's your loss, and nothing to be really proud of or brag about. "Why I'm still right that I didn't buy a boat."

[khalleron]

Originally Posted by braver

This thread is stupid. Jeff Bezos personally apologized for a technical action taken without his knowledge by mistake (by lower-level folks without thinking things through), and now the enetrprising student had made $150K on his notes.

The fact is that Kindle leads the market, and provides a testbed for the novel cases like removal of content which proves illegal after it's admitted into the system. Same as Apple Store -- it's bound to had happened, and someone had to learn the lesson.

As to the unwarranted generalization, one can simply observe that it's your loss, and nothing to be really proud of or brag about, really.

It's not 'stupid' - not if you think about it a minute.

You can't blame it on 'lower level people' unless you can show that they violated Amazon policy at the time they removed the books. What seems clear is that Amazon *had* no policy - they went ahead with the 'self-publishing' arm without any proper controls in place. No way to screen uploads for infringement *before* they were posted, no clear policy for dealing with anything that might slip through their (seemingly non-existent) controls.

Either Amazon was arrogant or stupid or both. You don't start a venture like this unless you have some idea how to deal with the contingencies and legalities. The whole system was completely open to abuse, and Amazon dealt with that abuse in the most heavy-handed and invasive way.

[braver]

Originally Posted by khalleron

It's not 'stupid' - not if you think about it a minute.

...

Ah, you caught me tempering down my initial reaction!

I believe that everything is easy in hindsight. Knowing how Amazon operates from the inside, my hunch is that a midlevel manager saw the ebook with the wrong rights got into Kindle and panicked.

What matters for the company's reputation is how they handle mistakes. Bezos handled it admirably.

If you think someone shouldn't do things before they know all the consequences far into the future, I say, go start an ebook/ereader business competing with Amazon and the rest, and do it better. Still better, go back in time and beat Amazon at it.

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by braver

This thread is silly.

No, it isn't. This thread isn't about Amazon's Orwellian Act. This thread is about their new promise that "we won't take books off your device again without your permission, except for when we will."

There is 1 and exactly 1 circumstance when a company has a right to reach into my hardware and remove something-- and that is when I explicitly ask them to. There are no other circumstances.

Up until a month ago, all my e-book reading has been on old PDAs, so for years I've been used to having to modify the format of files to get them to fit. Since I found "official" EPUB files to be horrible (double-spaced, large text even with the smallest font, far inferior to a text file or PDF of the same document as viewed on my 300) the only way I transfer files to and from my reader is via drag and drop from Windows Explorer, so Sony not only has no say over what's on my reader, they have no knowledge.

[braver]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

No, it isn't. This thread isn't about Amazon's Orwellian Act. This thread is about their new promise that "we won't take books off your device again without your permission, except for when we will."

There is 1 and exactly 1 circumstance when a company has a right to reach into my hardware and remove something-- and that is when I explicitly ask them to. There are no other circumstances.

And horses eat oats. I just love it when a bunch of folks reiterate each other's self-righteousness and belabor a simple and obvious point.

The fact is, Amazon is a pioneer, it stumbled on a problem, then righted itself. Case closed. Only due to its advanced technology and market share it could have been the first to encounter that problem. What, your reader doesn't have an always on connectivity? So nobody can revoke books from it? Wow!

Huffing and puffing over the revokation of ebook is old. Problem solved, next.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by braver

And horses eat oats. I just love it when a bunch of folks reiterate each other's self-righteousness and belabor a simple and obvious point.

The fact is, Amazon is a pioneer, it stumbled on a problem, then righted itself. Case closed. Only due to its advanced technology and market share it could have been the first to encounter that problem. What, your reader doesn't have an always on connectivity? So nobody can revoke books from it? Wow!

Huffing and puffing over the revokation of ebook is old. Problem solved, next.

What I hate is when someone new comes in and acts like they know everything and insist their position is the only one that is right, despite a majority of posters pointing out the obvious errors in their position. Stomping around and huffing and puffing and telling others what to do is old. Next.

[khalleron]

Originally Posted by braver

And horses eat oats. I just love it when a bunch of folks reiterate each other's self-righteousness and belabor a simple and obvious point.

The fact is, Amazon is a pioneer, it stumbled on a problem, then righted itself. Case closed. Only due to its advanced technology and market share it could have been the first to encounter that problem. What, your reader doesn't have an always on connectivity? So nobody can revoke books from it? Wow!

Huffing and puffing over the revokation of ebook is old. Problem solved, next.

Amazon is a pioneer? Hahahahahahaha

There have been ebook sellers around for at least a decade. They have their competitors beat on marketing, that's all.

They didn't 'stumble' on a problem. Anyone who allows anyone to upload anything needs to be prepared for attemped piracy. Not to do so is just plain stupid.

Since Amazon apparently doesn't want to become the Pirate Bay of ebooks, they should have been better prepared for what was an obvious hazard of their system. They weren't, so they're now paying for that.

And well they should.

Not paying enough, IMHO, but I'm willing to let you disagree on that point.

Just don't call me stupid. Or silly.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by rcuadro

Hell, I dont see the problem with it. Just because someone managed to "sell" an illegal book it does not mean that you can keep it.
Hell, go and buy a stolen bike and watch the police take it.
The only difference is that the boys in blue will not return your money

Buying stolen property has absolutely nothing to do with the Amazon scenario. The eBooks were not stolen and were legally purchased by the end users. Even Amazon recognizes that now.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Solicitous

Yeh but with buying a stolen bike at least the Police will knock on your door and say they are taking it, they don't one night sneak in, take it and leave a note on the way out. From what I have read about Amazon they're deleting the books and telling you after the fact.

Not to mention that Amazon isn't the police.

Besides, the whole analogy is nonsense. It has nothing to do with copyright. This is what comes from people thinking "copyright" = "theft". They have nothing to do with one another.

[astrodad]

Can someone who disagrees with Amazon's NEW policy (not the older one that happened MONTHS ago), please explain to me how YOU would handle the situation in their shoes?

I have no problems with the new policy, because a) Amazon is not scouring my Kindle (they are deleting server-side content) and B) it seems fair to everyone, including Amazon. And yes, they should have a fair deal in all of this, since you corp haters wouldn't even have a Kindle if Amazon hadn't desired to make a profit and make one.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by braver

Ah, you caught me tempering down my initial reaction!

I believe that everything is easy in hindsight. Knowing how Amazon operates from the inside, my hunch is that a midlevel manager saw the ebook with the wrong rights got into Kindle and panicked.

Had this been the first incident, that might have been true. It wasn't. Amazon had previously done the same thing over Ayn Rand's and JK Rowling's works, only those didn't result in lawsuits--potentially because neither of those sets were available as legit ebooks. However, the legal principle is the same from the buyer's perspective: they bought a book; it was the seller's job to make sure they had the right to sell it.

[NASCARaddicted]

Originally Posted by jplumey

And yes, they should have a fair deal in all of this, since you corp haters wouldn't even have a Kindle if Amazon hadn't desired to make a profit and make one.

So what ? The Kindle is not the only ebook reader available. It's like with the ipod - it may be very popular, but there are other companies who also build that stuff.

If you look at this thread, you will see that only a few of the people who post here have a Kindle. Many have Sony, IRex, Hanlin, etc ...

As it was pointed out by others: Amazon is not the only one who sells ebook (and as far as I know, they aren't the first, either). Same with the ebook reader.

You see ? I don't need the Kindle. And I don't need the ebooks of Amazon.

[kennyc]

Very true. It was the constant badgering of Kindle advertising that got me re-interested in the ebook market and it only took a few days of research to determine that the Kindle was NOT the way to go---at least for my needs and the way I see the market going.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by braver

The fact is that Kindle leads the market, and provides a testbed for the novel cases like removal of content which proves illegal after it's admitted into the system. Same as Apple Store -- it's bound to had happened, and someone had to learn the lesson.

Actually, it only leads in the US. Globally, the kindle is a drop in the bucket. Last I saw, they had 28% of the market share for ebook sales in the US (Q2 2009) and 45% of the reader market in the US. Globally speaking, I think the kindle only has like a 4% share, since the Kindle is not available yet outside of North America.

[astrodad]

Originally Posted by NASCARaddicted

So what ? The Kindle is not the only ebook reader available. It's like with the ipod - it may be very popular, but there are other companies who also build that stuff.

If you look at this thread, you will see that only a few of the people who post here have a Kindle. Many have Sony, IRex, Hanlin, etc ...

As it was pointed out by others: Amazon is not the only one who sells ebook (and as far as I know, they aren't the first, either). Same with the ebook reader.

You see ? I don't need the Kindle. And I don't need the ebooks of Amazon.

Great! Then why should you complain about their business practices? That's the beauty of capitalism and competition. If this kind of behavior from Amazon was so important, it would drive away their business. Since their Kindle business is booming (according to speculation, grant you), it's safe to say that most people have other things to worry about. For most people, Amazon's actions have mended the situation.